Redevelopment Closer Than Ever?

[guest49]

What annoy me is that the council pander to these people with an obvious axe to grind. They should be treated as individuals and not a collective claiming to represent the supporters of NTFC, because the way they want to go there will be no NTFC.

It’s hard to see that forum as anything other than a bunch egos with a point to prove…with the occasional random appearance.

I appreciate I could be talking about the Trust or this forum…..

Good luck to whatever chosen individuals are fighting our plight. Maybe it was a FB competition but the ones with social media presence seem to be pretty anti-owners. They should definitely have a working session on how to conduct yourself when in a responsible position.
Let’s hope we can protect the land we need for when KT exits stage left.

[GrangeParkCobbler]

Have the trust approached cilldara??
For all we know they might be prepared to buy the land for £2 million and guarantee the redevelopment in a quicker timescale than the present owners….
Very , very unlikely as their proposal hasn’t included anything to benefit the club, but have the trust actually opened dialogue with them to categorically state this is the case?
If you don’t ask…..

It appears the trust have made their position clear with one of the bidders but haven’t even approached the other (I’d like to know when the trust first knew of a second bidder)
Given they’ve been having meetings with the council for months it’s inconceivable to me that the first they knew of it was yesterday and yet they didn’t deem it necessary to inform the fans….

I’m left with two conclusions
1) despite having many meetings with the trust the council didn’t mention cilldara to them until yesterday.

2) the trust have known about them for sometime but didn’t inform the fans…

If it is 2) then it’s nothing short of a disgrace because we are days away from an important decision and still the trust seem to know no more about the other bidders than the general fan….

Did they deem it unimportant to at least communicate with cilldara and see if their was any chance of them getting involved with the redevelopment…..

In a nutshell how long have the trust known about the cilldara deal and if they haven’t known about them until recently doesn’t it show that the council were not communicating with them in the way they’d hoped?

See my post...the Trust knew nothing of a second bid, the council rep knew nothing of a second bid.......but its patently obvious that the Club did and have done for a couple of months......

Just to add.....it was the Trust AGM on Thursday night..... nothing was mentioned then other than we (the Trust) were being invited to a meeting the next evening at 6pm. Councillor Bignell did not tell us what it was about, the Trust Chair approached the Council leader and asked if we could be given a clue as to what it was about.....no information was given.
Then at about 4.30pm on Friday the Club issued a statement soon followed by other articles which indicated the presence of a second bidder for the land.

So, in answer to your conclusions it is number 1 which best fits...... yet again though, i'll say that the club knew and have known for a period of time, hence their revised bid submitted by the deadline of last Monday.

Rather than keep asking if the Trust knew or didn't, ask yourself why the Club knew but told nobody....perhaps not even the Supporters Director on the board...... yet if they did tell him it was not deemed important enough to tell the supporters.

[Shoemaker]

Nail hit on the head…

It has been proven before that you don’t need to be the sharpest to put one over the council.
This may seem very simplistic but surely the council could do a deal where the stand must be finished and then and only then will the land be sold to CDNL at the agreed price.
This would safeguard all eventualities meaning the land could not be sold on until the redevelopment was complete, hence no riding off into the sunset….

A ten year old could fathom this but in fairness a ten year old wouldn’t have continually given money away without seeing anything in return but somehow our council managed it, hence peoples scepticism regards this deal being in anyway watertight as far as benefit for the football club goes…..

[guest49]

You don't think the politicians have minds of their own and don't get representations from any other interested parties? Are you suggesting that they will ignore the latest 43 page document issued by the club in favour of items raised at a Zoom meeting which THEY called last week?

Using politicians is probably not the best analogy. 

[GrangeParkCobbler]

Using politicians is probably not the best analogy. 

In the current climate perhaps you're right!! 

[Shoemaker]

See my post...the Trust knew nothing of a second bid, the council rep knew nothing of a second bid.......but its patently obvious that the Club did and have done for a couple of months......

Just to add.....it was the Trust AGM on Thursday night..... nothing was mentioned then other than we (the Trust) were being invited to a meeting the next evening at 6pm. Councillor Bignell did not tell us what it was about, the Trust Chair approached the Council leader and asked if we could be given a clue as to what it was about.....no information was given.
Then at about 4.30pm on Friday the Club issued a statement soon followed by other articles which indicated the presence of a second bidder for the land.

So, in answer to your conclusions it is number 1 which best fits...... yet again though, i'll say that the club knew and have known for a period of time, hence their revised bid submitted by the deadline of last Monday.

Rather than keep asking if the Trust knew or didn't, ask yourself why the Club knew but told nobody....perhaps not even the Supporters Director on the board...... yet if they did tell him it was not deemed important enough to tell the supporters.

Thanks for the reply but I’m still sceptical….
A second bid was made for the land by cilldara.

Who was that bid sent to?
TGI Fridays..?
KFC?
Everbrite?
Manwork?
You?
It want sent to me.
The trust didn’t receive it.

If Cilldara were tendering a bid in competition to the football club I doubt it was sent to them detailing how much more they were prepared to pay than their only competitor.

I’ve checked with WH Smith and Tesco and neither of them received the bid so I’m narrowing it down…
The BP garage across the way haven’t received it….

I’ve got a hunch that I know who the bid was sent to…..
IF it was sent to who I think it was then it must have been very late on Thursday night and hence dismissed out of hand but hang on a minute here….

Didn’t the (spoiler alert) COUNCIL say that they received initial bids and then asked for a second bid from both CDNL and cilldara….
I’m onto something here….
You say the council knew nothing of it when they met you….

This is even more unbelievable than partygate….

What is really going on here….

[Ragdoll Cobbler]

I think a simple Trust Board view is thus.... (following a meeting tonight)

We DO want to see the East Stand completed.
We DO NOT wish to block the CDNL deal.
We DO however feel that the ACV land should be retained for the future benefit of the club. It is separate and not included in the Cilldara deal and should not be included in the CDNL deal.

We do not know enough about the other party, although there is information out there which suggests they are part of a much bigger conglomerate with large financial clout, however apart from leaving the "Club land" with the club they don't offer anything else to NTFC.

A statement will be issued by the Trust Chairman in the next day or two..... but i'm expecting the points above to be reflected.

How does the plan affect the ACV – Asset of Community Value – and can this delay the process?

Technically the Asset of Community Value is between WNC and the ACV holder (Supporters Trust). The ACV gives the holder the right to bid for a particular asset but not the right to buy. In simple terms it allows the holder 6 weeks to indicate they would like to bid and then a further four and a half months to deliver the finances. At the end of this six-month period WNC is under no obligation to sell to the holder and any agreement with the club can then be completed. There is also a provision for the holder to waive the ACV at any point during this period.

In terms of this land, whilst the ACV covers the athletics track as well as the stadium it would seem very strange with all the obvious benefits to the club that anyone would want to delay matters for that period of time. If the ACV holder decided to do that we believe it would be very disappointing for the club and our fans, but this is a legal process and the club would be left with no choice just to follow the process and wait for the period to run out.

The club has always felt that including the athletics track in the ACV was probably a stretch in the first place as this area of land has not been used by any community group for over eight years and the club has never really benefitted from this land anyway. The athletics track was already replaced with a state of the art facility at Moulton College in 2015 and this area of land has sat disused since then.

The club understands the stadium being included within an ACV and have no issue with this but to try and claim that the athletics track land is of club or community importance is not a position the club can agree with. The stadium is protected and will continue to be protected but the club feel the use of some of the athletics track for enabling development and the rest for a possible fan zone area and additional parking can only be considered in the best interests for the club short, medium and long term.

So, I assume the trust will be challenging this if the CDNL deal gets Council approval, thus delaying things further?

Again, The Trust, making huge decisions without consulting their members...how is this even possible!?

What's the point of actually being a trust member when members are never consulted?

[Shoemaker]

Il give the trust a little friendly nudge here…

I think the council have known about cilldara and their bid for a little while and may or may not have informed the club.
The trust as I understand it don’t have great lines of communication with the club at the moment but the trust have on numerous occasions told the fanbase of meetings with the council…

I think despite all the tea and biscuits the council were having meetings with you at a time when they already knew about the cilldara bid but didn’t inform the trust….

Imo that makes all the meetings a complete waste of time…..

Only the council can say why they didn’t inform you of this important development….
In fairness I’m sure they could hide behind a notional non disclosure agreement BUT the club as you say evidently knew (no one has come out and confirmed this hence I say may)and the supporters rep on the board should have known and informed the fans….

He didn’t.

Did he know and if so when did he know and if he did but failed to report back to the fans will he be offering his resignation?

[GrangeParkCobbler]

How does the plan affect the ACV – Asset of Community Value – and can this delay the process?

Technically the Asset of Community Value is between WNC and the ACV holder (Supporters Trust). The ACV gives the holder the right to bid for a particular asset but not the right to buy. In simple terms it allows the holder 6 weeks to indicate they would like to bid and then a further four and a half months to deliver the finances. At the end of this six-month period WNC is under no obligation to sell to the holder and any agreement with the club can then be completed. There is also a provision for the holder to waive the ACV at any point during this period.

In terms of this land, whilst the ACV covers the athletics track as well as the stadium it would seem very strange with all the obvious benefits to the club that anyone would want to delay matters for that period of time. If the ACV holder decided to do that we believe it would be very disappointing for the club and our fans, but this is a legal process and the club would be left with no choice just to follow the process and wait for the period to run out.

The club has always felt that including the athletics track in the ACV was probably a stretch in the first place as this area of land has not been used by any community group for over eight years and the club has never really benefitted from this land anyway. The athletics track was already replaced with a state of the art facility at Moulton College in 2015 and this area of land has sat disused since then.

The club understands the stadium being included within an ACV and have no issue with this but to try and claim that the athletics track land is of club or community importance is not a position the club can agree with. The stadium is protected and will continue to be protected but the club feel the use of some of the athletics track for enabling development and the rest for a possible fan zone area and additional parking can only be considered in the best interests for the club short, medium and long term.

So, I assume the trust will be challenging this if the CDNL deal gets Council approval, thus delaying things further?

Again, The Trust, making huge decisions without consulting their members...how is this even possible!?

What's the point of actually being a trust member when members are never consulted?

The Trust position on the ACV land has been pretty clear for a while now...perhaps since the Trust got the ACV in the first place!! As i've said above, there was the Trust AGM last week.....how many of the naysayers bothered to turn up at the meeting and give an opinion/raise an issue?
How about the members consult with the Trust? Or is it all one way?

If...and I say if the decision is made to go with the CDNL bid then yes the Trust could make a representation about the ACV land, but the board has already indicated that it will canvass its members opinion on such a matter.
Don't for one minute think that if the deal is rubber stamped in two weeks time that its all systems go....the Council have indicated that it will be another 6-9 months before the legal side of any agreement is thrashed out.

[Shoemaker]

So, I assume the trust will be challenging this if the CDNL deal gets Council approval, thus delaying things further?

Again, The Trust, making huge decisions without consulting their members...how is this even possible!?

What's the point of actually being a trust member when members are never consulted?

I posted months ago regards this but still it continues….
They cannot claim to be democratic and acting in their members best interests if the same members are not consulted and offered a chance to voice opinions or have the chance to vote on a course of action.

A dozen people should not be making decisions based on their own opinions when those decisions effect thousands of fans.
From what I gather some at the meetings with the council weren’t on the trust board but somehow got the nod to tag along (on what basis this was decided who knows but I bet the membership wasn’t consulted)

The only thing that I’m sure of is that since this redevelopment was first mooted by David Cardozo there have been many staggering levels of incompetence by many people on many levels….

That is the reality and why years later things still haven’t been sorted out and other clubs have built complete new stadiums in the time that our stand hasn’t had 800 seats added.

That my friends is a staggering level of incompetence.

[GrangeParkCobbler]

I posted months ago regards this but still it continues….
They cannot claim to be democratic and acting in their members best interests if the same members are not consulted and offered a chance to voice opinions or have the chance to vote on a course of action.

A dozen people should not be making decisions based on their own opinions when those decisions effect thousands of fans.
From what I gather some at the meetings with the council weren’t on the trust board but somehow got the nod to tag along (on what basis this was decided who knows but I bet the membership wasn’t consulted)

The only thing that I’m sure of is that since this redevelopment was first mooted by David Cardozo there have been many staggering levels of incompetence by many people on many levels….

That is the reality and why years later things still haven’t been sorted out and other clubs have built complete new stadiums in the time that our stand hasn’t had 800 seats added.

That my friends is a staggering level of incompetence.

Again, see my previous post!

[singcobb]

The Trust position on the ACV land has been pretty clear for a while now...perhaps since the Trust got the ACV in the first place!! As i've said above, there was the Trust AGM last week.....how many of the naysayers bothered to turn up at the meeting and give an opinion/raise an issue?
How about the members consult with the Trust? Or is it all one way?

If...and I say if the decision is made to go with the CDNL bid then yes the Trust could make a representation about the ACV land, but the board has already indicated that it will canvass its members opinion on such a matter.
Don't for one minute think that if the deal is rubber stamped in two weeks time that its all systems go....the Council have indicated that it will be another 6-9 months before the legal side of any agreement is thrashed out.

Let's be blunt and honest about this. The Trust got the ACV on the land with the sole intention of making life difficult for the club and it's owners, nothing more nothing, showing blatantly that they are a million miles out of touch with the fanbase. I wouldn't buy a used washing machine from the trust board and it's "special advisors".

[Shoemaker]

The Trust position on the ACV land has been pretty clear for a while now...perhaps since the Trust got the ACV in the first place!! As i've said above, there was the Trust AGM last week.....how many of the naysayers bothered to turn up at the meeting and give an opinion/raise an issue?
How about the members consult with the Trust? Or is it all one way?

If...and I say if the decision is made to go with the CDNL bid then yes the Trust could make a representation about the ACV land, but the board has already indicated that it will canvass its members opinion on such a matter.
Don't for one minute think that if the deal is rubber stamped in two weeks time that its all systems go....the Council have indicated that it will be another 6-9 months before the legal side of any agreement is thrashed out.

Would it not have been better to gauge opinion of the members regards this before now rather than issuing the trusts boards thoughts regards this and issuing a statement that has in theory only been agreed by the board rather than its members.
If you offer the members an opinion / vote on matters first you can then issue statements safe in the knowledge that everyone has had their equal chance to voice their opinions by way of ballot.
Issuing statements and then allowing the membership whether to agree with it is rather arse about face imo.

[GrangeParkCobbler]

Let's be blunt and honest about this. The Trust got the ACV on the land with the sole intention of making life difficult for the club and it's owners, nothing more nothing, showing blatantly that they are a million miles out of touch with the fanbase. I wouldn't buy a used washing machine from the trust board and it's "special advisors".

Is that a fact? Can you provide me with proof of the above please. Then I can take it back to the other board members and "advise" them accordingly.

[Melbourne Cobbler]

The fundamental flaw in your hypothesis of doom Melly and this fûcking Deloitte report that you may have mentioned a couple of hundred times is they have linearised the data! The average L2 club loses £1m a year is utter nonsense and doesn’t give you the granular view you need to make decisions about how a club is doing against it’s piers.
Is Bradford losing £1m a year the same as Barrow losing the same amount? Of course not, as I said it depends what we are spending the other £4.4m a year on.

That’s incredible.

[GrangeParkCobbler]

Thanks for the reply but I’m still sceptical….
A second bid was made for the land by cilldara.

Who was that bid sent to?
TGI Fridays..?
KFC?
Everbrite?
Manwork?
You?
It want sent to me.
The trust didn’t receive it.

If Cilldara were tendering a bid in competition to the football club I doubt it was sent to them detailing how much more they were prepared to pay than their only competitor.

I’ve checked with WH Smith and Tesco and neither of them received the bid so I’m narrowing it down…
The BP garage across the way haven’t received it….

I’ve got a hunch that I know who the bid was sent to…..
IF it was sent to who I think it was then it must have been very late on Thursday night and hence dismissed out of hand but hang on a minute here….

Didn’t the (spoiler alert) COUNCIL say that they received initial bids and then asked for a second bid from both CDNL and cilldara….
I’m onto something here….
You say the council knew nothing of it when they met you….

This is even more unbelievable than partygate….

What is really going on here….

If I did say that I should have said that the Council, or more specifically the Councillor, knew nothing of it.....or at least he said nothing of it. All if's buts and maybe's!

Going up a few lines....this was not a competitive bidding process. It seems Cilldara only made their bid after they learned in the press of the CDNL bid. The original Cilldara bid was for around £1.7m. upon receiving this bid the Council went back to the club...i'm sure at that point they may have said there was another party involved and a bid had been made.
Second bids were invited, Cilldara upped their bid to just over £2m, CDNL kept their price the same but added some guarantees around the future development. 

[guest3338]

I think a simple Trust Board view is thus.... (following a meeting tonight)

We DO want to see the East Stand completed.
We DO NOT wish to block the CDNL deal.
We DO however feel that the ACV land should be retained for the future benefit of the club. It is separate and not included in the Cilldara deal and should not be included in the CDNL deal.

We do not know enough about the other party, although there is information out there which suggests they are part of a much bigger conglomerate with large financial clout, however apart from leaving the "Club land" with the club they don't offer anything else to NTFC.

A statement will be issued by the Trust Chairman in the next day or two..... but i'm expecting the points above to be reflected.

Thanks for this GPC

[Manwork04]

That’s incredible.

Yep.

[GrangeParkCobbler]

Let's be blunt and honest about this. The Trust got the ACV on the land with the sole intention of making life difficult for the club and it's owners, nothing more nothing, showing blatantly that they are a million miles out of touch with the fanbase. I wouldn't buy a used washing machine from the trust board and it's "special advisors".

https://www.ntfctrust.co.uk/news/article/statement-sixfields-acv-and-east-stand

"The announcement is the culmination of a long-running application by the Trust, dating back to 2015, asking for the stadium to be given this status."  

Hmmmm....2015.... 2015....why does that year ring a bell? What was happening that year?

You really think that this was about "making life difficult for the club and its owners"

[Melbourne Cobbler]

The clubs turnover is approximately £5.5m, the playing budget is £1.1m, discuss.

The figure you are quoting is from the accounts filed with companies house to June 2020 which I believe would have included the transfer of Charlie Goode. Without that wouldn’t the turnover actually reflect £4,376,530.00? Either way that is one return. There is a very specific reason why financial institutions look at returns over a number of years to establish risk and the true position of a business, and I am assuming you know what that is? That is unless you want to cherry pick an anomaly and base your opinion around that. It’s the general view that rather than look at figures in isolation you need to look at overall trends to establish the most likely outcome. A bit like your favourite much loved Deloitte report. The most comprehensive independent financial  report on football finance that has been published to date. Your debating position is to disregard that and base your argument on one off or extreme examples. If that’s the level we are fcuked. Discuss.